HADECS 3 cameras on the M25
Discussion
[quote=Davidonly]So the situation is that now the very safest road type has the most speed cameras and driving at a previously ignored 80 mph (by real, ie capable of thinking LEO's) along long stretches of UK road space (that we paid for) could now result in a ban within a couple of miles. What's the point in that?
I refer to the ludicrous notion of using these 'SMART' cameras 24/7 even when traffic is light or zero.
What the f
k are we putting up with that for?
/quote]
So what are we going to do about it?
I refer to the ludicrous notion of using these 'SMART' cameras 24/7 even when traffic is light or zero.
What the f
k are we putting up with that for?/quote]
So what are we going to do about it?
When "smart" motorways were introduced with hard shoulder running and variable speed limits, Gatso speed cameras were placed in some of the overhead gantries to enforce the reduced speed limits when they were in place. Neither the police, nor the Highways Agency nor the government officially said whether these cameras enforced the National Speed Limit. Some people would say they never did, some say it varied from one area to another depending on the whims of the local police.
Now we have this new HADECS camera which is one camera on the side of the gantry, rather than a Gatso over each lane, and apparently that does enforce the National Speed Limit if no lower limit is in place.
The point of managed motorways was to speed up traffic flow, not to make it easier to break the speed limit obviously, but it was never really about enforcing any particular speed limit beyond the necessity to persuade people to abide by the reduced ones and stop people hammering up to the tail end of traffic jams and perpetuating them. This seems to have been rather forgotten in a drive to cash in and perpetuate an idea that only speeding causes danger on the roads. I was discussing managed motorways the other day and he said they're a good idea and, "Reduced speed has to be good all round."
Now we have this new HADECS camera which is one camera on the side of the gantry, rather than a Gatso over each lane, and apparently that does enforce the National Speed Limit if no lower limit is in place.
The point of managed motorways was to speed up traffic flow, not to make it easier to break the speed limit obviously, but it was never really about enforcing any particular speed limit beyond the necessity to persuade people to abide by the reduced ones and stop people hammering up to the tail end of traffic jams and perpetuating them. This seems to have been rather forgotten in a drive to cash in and perpetuate an idea that only speeding causes danger on the roads. I was discussing managed motorways the other day and he said they're a good idea and, "Reduced speed has to be good all round."
Ha Ha top bumping, my own thread, LOL
Interesting I thought .. re 70mph, assume 79+ tickets?
http://www.courier.co.uk/Secret-M25-speed-cameras-...
HUNDREDS of drivers on the M25 have been nabbed by the stealth speed cameras in just two months.
The grey cameras were fitted between junctions 5 for Sevenoaks and 7 for the M23 during a £129 million ‘smart motorway’ scheme.
The first speed traps were installed near Sevenoaks last May, while other devices were installed on northern sections in December.
Kent Police figures show some 528 motorists were fined in a two-month period for breaking the 70 miles per hour limit.
Interesting I thought .. re 70mph, assume 79+ tickets?
http://www.courier.co.uk/Secret-M25-speed-cameras-...
HUNDREDS of drivers on the M25 have been nabbed by the stealth speed cameras in just two months.
The grey cameras were fitted between junctions 5 for Sevenoaks and 7 for the M23 during a £129 million ‘smart motorway’ scheme.
The first speed traps were installed near Sevenoaks last May, while other devices were installed on northern sections in December.
Kent Police figures show some 528 motorists were fined in a two-month period for breaking the 70 miles per hour limit.
Andyuk911 said:
Ha Ha top bumping, my own thread, LOL
Interesting I thought .. re 70mph, assume 79+ tickets?
http://www.courier.co.uk/Secret-M25-speed-cameras-...
HUNDREDS of drivers on the M25 have been nabbed by the stealth speed cameras in just two months.
The grey cameras were fitted between junctions 5 for Sevenoaks and 7 for the M23 during a £129 million ‘smart motorway’ scheme.
The first speed traps were installed near Sevenoaks last May, while other devices were installed on northern sections in December.
Kent Police figures show some 528 motorists were fined in a two-month period for breaking the 70 miles per hour limit.
If it's anything like the northern M25 (Herts/Essex), it will be fish in a barrel when reduced speeds are signed. I would estimate 90%+ non-compliance. Dangerous trying to move from lane 4 to lane 1 when complying with the newly posted speed.Interesting I thought .. re 70mph, assume 79+ tickets?
http://www.courier.co.uk/Secret-M25-speed-cameras-...
HUNDREDS of drivers on the M25 have been nabbed by the stealth speed cameras in just two months.
The grey cameras were fitted between junctions 5 for Sevenoaks and 7 for the M23 during a £129 million ‘smart motorway’ scheme.
The first speed traps were installed near Sevenoaks last May, while other devices were installed on northern sections in December.
Kent Police figures show some 528 motorists were fined in a two-month period for breaking the 70 miles per hour limit.
My uncle is a senior observer in the IAM and he said he and other IAM people had been questioning the Highways Agency and the police about these cameras. They said that sometimes the information gathered by the Gatso cameras would only be reviewed if an accident occurred to see what the speeds were like leading up to it. Otherwise only the top 10% of speeding motorists would be creamed off and prosecuted. There were too many people speeding to deal with all of them.
These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted. The 10% +1 rule is probably applied but, considering it was apparently issues of losing women's votes that stopped the 80mph limit being introduced and not safety, I don't see how it's necessary to book people doing 79mph.
As we're in an election year we need to make this an election issue so those campaigning for our votes understand they have to do something about it.
These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted. The 10% +1 rule is probably applied but, considering it was apparently issues of losing women's votes that stopped the 80mph limit being introduced and not safety, I don't see how it's necessary to book people doing 79mph.
As we're in an election year we need to make this an election issue so those campaigning for our votes understand they have to do something about it.
Blakewater said:
My uncle is a senior observer in the IAM and he said he and other IAM people had been questioning the Highways Agency and the police about these cameras. They said that sometimes the information gathered by the Gatso cameras would only be reviewed if an accident occurred to see what the speeds were like leading up to it. Otherwise only the top 10% of speeding motorists would be creamed off and prosecuted. There were too many people speeding to deal with all of them.
These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted. The 10% +1 rule is probably applied but, considering it was apparently issues of losing women's votes that stopped the 80mph limit being introduced and not safety, I don't see how it's necessary to book people doing 79mph.
As we're in an election year we need to make this an election issue so those campaigning for our votes understand they have to do something about it.
It's necessary to enforce a limit if you are going to have a limit, there will then always be a prosecution threshold. That's the thing with lines drawn in the sand.These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted. The 10% +1 rule is probably applied but, considering it was apparently issues of losing women's votes that stopped the 80mph limit being introduced and not safety, I don't see how it's necessary to book people doing 79mph.
As we're in an election year we need to make this an election issue so those campaigning for our votes understand they have to do something about it.
vonhosen said:
Blakewater said:
My uncle is a senior observer in the IAM and he said he and other IAM people had been questioning the Highways Agency and the police about these cameras. They said that sometimes the information gathered by the Gatso cameras would only be reviewed if an accident occurred to see what the speeds were like leading up to it. Otherwise only the top 10% of speeding motorists would be creamed off and prosecuted. There were too many people speeding to deal with all of them.
These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted. The 10% +1 rule is probably applied but, considering it was apparently issues of losing women's votes that stopped the 80mph limit being introduced and not safety, I don't see how it's necessary to book people doing 79mph.
As we're in an election year we need to make this an election issue so those campaigning for our votes understand they have to do something about it.
It's necessary to enforce a limit if you are going to have a limit, there will then always be a prosecution threshold. That's the thing with lines drawn in the sand.These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted. The 10% +1 rule is probably applied but, considering it was apparently issues of losing women's votes that stopped the 80mph limit being introduced and not safety, I don't see how it's necessary to book people doing 79mph.
As we're in an election year we need to make this an election issue so those campaigning for our votes understand they have to do something about it.
My father's house was burgled when I was a nipper and thoroughly investigated, leading to an arrest and conviction. That house is now undergoing extensive remodelling and was burgled again last year. This time we got a civilian for five minutes who said yes, you've been burgled all right, here's a crime number, bye. And that was it.
Still, mustn't complain, plenty of plod sneaking about in unmarked cars, nabbing people for heinous speed transgressions.
I'm not even exaggerating when I say that on my daily commute on the M25 I see a handful of cars getting flashed without fail each way, now that's obviously as I'm approaching them, either with traffic travelling on the other side where I can see the flash, or people flying past me. Now I can't even begin to imagine how many people are getting caught on a daily basis
It seems that a lot of people aren't aware of them.
It seems that a lot of people aren't aware of them.
Edited by pops and bangs on Thursday 15th January 23:24
I don't disagree, but we're entitled to say where we think the line should be drawn, how we think the law should be enforced and what we think the punishment for breaking it should be. People will disagree but maybe we should have more open and clear voting on these things. A lot of what gets people's backs up is they feel they don't have a choice and a say.
I think there should be a minimum price on alcohol as people getting stupidly drunk on cheap booze causes such a strain on the NHS and law enforcement as well as leading to violence and domestic problems and many towns and cities being no go areas at night, as well as during the day sometimes, for more sober and sensible people. Some people may think that's draconian and taking away people's freedoms and it's something the government is reluctant to do. If everyone was asked their opinion on it, how many would actually support it?
I think there should be a minimum price on alcohol as people getting stupidly drunk on cheap booze causes such a strain on the NHS and law enforcement as well as leading to violence and domestic problems and many towns and cities being no go areas at night, as well as during the day sometimes, for more sober and sensible people. Some people may think that's draconian and taking away people's freedoms and it's something the government is reluctant to do. If everyone was asked their opinion on it, how many would actually support it?
pops and bangs said:
It seems that a lot of people aren't aware of them.
Maybe they know the ticket threshold and continue to chance it daily.If they get flashed at 80mph everyday but don't get a ticket it's tempting to some drivers to see what they can get away with.
I suspect the threshold is over 90, but I would not take that risk.
mybrainhurts said:
vonhosen said:
Blakewater said:
These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted.
It's necessary to enforce a limit if you are going to have a limit, there will then always be a prosecution threshold. That's the thing with lines drawn in the sand.Still, mustn't complain, plenty of plod sneaking about in unmarked cars, nabbing people for heinous speed transgressions.
pops and bangs said:
I'm not even exaggerating when I say that on my daily commute on the M25 I see at handful of cars getting flashed without fail each way, now that's obviously as I'm approaching them, either with traffic travelling on the other side where I can see the flash, or people flying past me. Now I can't even begin to imagine how many people are getting caught on a daily basis
It seems that a lot of people aren't aware of them.
According to the linked figures about 9 people. Considering how many pass those cameras daily the trigger speed is obviously higher than 79. It seems that a lot of people aren't aware of them.
lbc said:
but I would not take that risk.
Me neither. I always make a point to watch my speed when going past them. As I commute on the m25 daily I know where they are now.I don't know why and it is awful but I go all warm inside when I see someone get flashed, especially someone that's been right up my arse, I move over and "flash" (childish I know)
speedyguy said:
mybrainhurts said:
vonhosen said:
Blakewater said:
These new cameras are all automatic so the data is gathered and the NIPs sent out with no human intervention, so everyone can be prosecuted.
It's necessary to enforce a limit if you are going to have a limit, there will then always be a prosecution threshold. That's the thing with lines drawn in the sand.Still, mustn't complain, plenty of plod sneaking about in unmarked cars, nabbing people for heinous speed transgressions.
speedyguy said:
So Mybrainhurts after reading Blakewaters comment about the automation of speed data gathering and processing you agree it is a good thing for relevant or necessary speed enforcement to be done by Hadecs as it frees up plod sneaking about to do something more worthwhile?
Your assertion is only valid, if the budget remains a constant, or is rpi/cpi linked.Kevin.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff